National Land Acquisition Plan US Department of the Interior and US Department of Agriculture February, 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary...iii CHAPTER 1: Introduction...1 Report Language...1 Scope and Organization...1 CHAPTER 2: Background...5 Missions and Profiles of Land Managing Agencies...5 Chart: Origin of Surface Areas of Lands Managed by the Agencies...10 Funding Sources...11 Cooperative Conservation...13 CHART: Acres Acquired and Associated Costs (FY 2001 FY 2003)...14 CHART: Disposals by Land Managing Agencies...15 CHAPTER 3: Goals and Departmental Objectives...17 Departmental Objectives...17 Goals...18 Matrix: Goals and Departmental Objectives...20 Land Transaction Principles...22 CHAPTER 4: Land Acquisition Strategy Tools and Processes...25 National Approaches...25 Tools...26 CHART: Advantages/Disadvantages of Land Management Tools...27 Process to Determine which Land Management Tools Best Ensure Attainment of Departmental Objectives...29 Step One: Identifying Land for Protection...31 Step Two: Options to Manage and Protect Lands...32 Step Three: Decision Process to Determine Type of Land Protection...33 i
Step Four: Choosing the Method of Acquisition...35 How Agencies Ensure Land Acquisition Supports Goals and Objectives...36 CHAPTER 5: Consultation and Coordination...39 Consultation with Non-Federal Partners...39 Interagency Coordination and Consultation Process...40 New Interagency Coordination Proposal...41 CHAPTER 6: Monitoring and Evaluation...43 Conclusion...50 ANNEX 1: Evaluation of Authorities...51 ANNEX 2: Methods for Receiving and Evaluating Public Input...59 ANNEX 3: Issues Associated with Transfers of Military and Other Federal Lands...67 CHART: Costs Associated with Land Transfers to DOI and USDA...75 APPENDIX A: How Land Acquisitions Help Achieve Agency Goals and Departmental Objectives (Details to Supplement Chapter 3)...81 APPENDIX B: Specific Criteria Agencies Use for Projects...87 APPENDIX C: Sequence of Agency Planning Processes when Land Acquisition is Selected...92 APPENDIX D: Mission and Background of the Bureau of Reclamation...93 APPENDIX E: Operations and Maintenance Cost Information (Details to Supplement Chapter 4)...94 APPENDIX F: Definitions of Land Management Tools...97 (Cover Photo: Atwood Basin Ashley National Forest, Utah) ii
National Land Acquisition Plan Executive Summary The House Report on the FY 2004 Appropriations Act for Interior and Related Agencies includes the following directive: The Committee directs the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to develop jointly a long-term national plan outlining the acreage goals and conservation objectives for Federal land acquisition. The plan must demonstrate how the agencies will work together to realize acreage goals and must include a schedule for monitoring progress in meeting Federal land acquisition goals. Additionally, the plan should: 1) evaluate existing authorities regarding the disposal and consolidation of Federal Lands ; 2) review the methods employed for receiving and evaluating public input on potential acquisitions; and 3) address the reimbursement of all costs associated with the transfer of former military and other Federal lands to the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service. This report specifically focuses on the Committee s directive to develop a long-term national plan that outlines the ultimate objectives (Departmental objectives) and demonstrates how land acquisition contributes both directly and indirectly to achieving these objectives. The Departments 1 have identified three conservation objectives, all stemming from the DOI Strategic Plan. These Departmental conservation objectives are: 1) Resource Protection, 2) Recreation, and 3) Serving Communities. The Departments have also identified Resource Use and Management Excellence as Departmental objectives. While these are not Departmental conservation objectives, they have great importance to both Departments represented in the report. Land transactions play a direct and indirect role in management excellence and in resource use (e.g., through increased manageability of lands made possible through the acquisition and disposal of selected lands). Chapter 3 and Appendix A provide a more robust discussion of the Departmental objectives. To respond to the Committee s directive, an interdepartmental team 2 developed this report to explain how Departmental objectives set the focus and direction for land management decisions, and how agency decision processes incorporate this direction to ensure that land is effectively protected and managed. To accomplish these objectives, the agencies utilize a suite of land management tools, of which land acquisition is just one. To make efficient use of Federal resources, it is crucial that the most appropriate tool in the suite be selected. This examination of the processes agencies employ for selecting the most appropriate tool, and for highlighting the nexus between these processes and the Departmental objectives, marks the first significant effort to compile this information. The evaluation showed that the agencies have a focus and direction for priorities concerning land acquisition. This report highlights the agency processes for selecting the most appropriate tool, along with some proposed improvements, so that it is clear to Congress, as well as the public, that land acquisition is used with discretion, extensive public input, and only when appropriate. However, the Departments also acknowledge that because this is a first effort, there may be opportunities for improving land acquisition processes that are not identified in this report. The Departments will continue to 1 For the purposes of this report, Departments refers to both the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA). Additionally, agencies refers to the bureaus within DOI as well as the Forest Service (FS). 2 Staff from the National Park Service (NPS), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the Office of the Secretary within DOI, and the US Forest Service (FS) within the USDA participated in the compilation of this report. iii
evaluate opportunities for improving land acquisition processes and will report to Congress on any significant changes in the future. The graphic, or roadmap, shown to the right, outlines the sequence of steps the agencies follow in developing their land management strategies. As described in this report, each agency uses detailed processes to determine which land management strategy to implement, including when to use acquisition as a land management tool. These complex processes take into account a wide variety of factors, such as public values, accountability, transparency, and respect for private property, as well as other factors to help attain the Departmental objectives and agency goals. This roadmap is explained in greater detail in Chapter 1. Non-Acquisition Missions of Land Management Agencies Departmental Objectives and Agency Goals Decision Processes and Consultations Monitor and Evaluate Progress Towards Goals and Objectives Acquisition Key Findings This joint long-term national plan presents the framework for land acquisition decisions based on strategic goals. Both Departments conservation objectives (resource protection, recreation, and serving communities) provide the basis for specific programmatic actions. Though the conservation objectives stem from the DOI strategic plan, the FS goals relating to land acquisition are largely analogous. This planning framework is complemented by four agency step-down plans, and specific programmatic plans, that consider the priority and future needs for a full spectrum of conservation tools, including land acquisition. Therefore, this national plan presents, by necessity, four separate yet interrelated agency plans. To meet the Departmental objectives and agency goals, the Departments use a suite of tools that include cooperative conservation and land acquisition. The Departments have significantly increased investments in cooperative conservation programs that allow for the achievement of conservation objectives and often preclude the need for acquisition. For example, the Departments utilize alternative tools to Federal acquisition such as partnerships (e.g., the Forest Legacy Program), state grants (e.g., the Landowner Incentive Program), and matching funds to landowners (e.g., the Challenge Cost Share Program). Land managing agencies planning processes provide an institutionalized, structured approach to plan for long-term conservation objectives tied to budget development. This approach provides a framework for prioritizing conservation actions and determining whether and how acquisition should be utilized. When land acquisition is selected as the appropriate tool, it plays a key role, both directly and indirectly, in achieving Departmental objectives and agency goals. Through these processes, the Departments monitor, on an annual basis, progress in achieving conservation goals. The approach proposed in Chapter 6 improves the Departments abilities to plan for the future, adapt to changing needs, and evaluate the effectiveness of land management outcomes. It further allows the Departments to maintain needed flexibility to adjust the blend of program tools used based on progress in achieving end outcome goals and addressing other strategic and practical considerations. The iv
proposed approach provides for monitoring of progress in achieving goals, including agency reports of accomplishments. The Departments will continue to improve their processes, thereby better identifying how these tools, including acquisition, lead to achievement of end outcome goals, i.e., the conservation objectives. Acreage goals are not an appropriate measure to determine if the conservation objectives are achieved, as they result in outputs and not outcomes, which as noted above, may be achieved by means other than acquisition. The Departments will work to improve measures and better quantify results in order to link results to inputs and outputs, or activities. The agencies existing legislative authorities provide them with tools and safeguards to discharge their responsibilities to the public for the acquisition, disposal and prudent administration of the Federal estate. See Annex 1 for a review of the authorities. The agencies methods for receiving, reviewing and evaluating public input are important components of their decision-making processes for determining if and how to acquire lands. While the processes the agencies use to solicit and receive public input differ slightly, in general, public input is solicited and considered at the planning stages, and public input is sought again if any land transactions deviate, or were unforeseen in the planning stage (e.g., for land exchanges). Annex 2 provides a discussion of the methods employed for receiving and evaluating public input on potential acquisitions. The DOI and the USDA receive the majority of transferred lands from the Department of Defense (DOD), but also receive some land from the Department of Energy (DOE). A major concern to both the DOI and the USDA is that many of these lands contain environmental contaminants stemming from past DOD and DOE activities. Often some of the burden of cleaning these lands to an acceptable level for DOI/USDA purposes falls to the receiving agencies. Annex 3 discusses the various issues, problems, and costs associated with these land transfers. While the Departmental objectives and agency goals provide a strong focus and direction for land acquisition, the agencies can improve in the following areas: 1) Improved Coordination among Federal Agencies While the agencies currently consult with each other, improvements are needed to better coordinate to ensure that lands are managed in the most appropriate manner and by the agency or entity best suited to manage the land. A new process for increased inter-agency as well as intra-agency consultation and coordination has been developed as a result of this report. (See page 41.) 2) Improved Monitoring The agencies each have various processes for monitoring and evaluating their land acquisition programs. These focus on the role acquisition plays in meeting Departmental objectives and agency goals, ensuring clear policies and guidance are provided, and determining if the outcomes are cost-effective. However, the agencies will strengthen these evaluations by augmenting their existing procedures with periodic retrospective assessments. (See Chapter 6 for more details.) 3) O&M While operations and maintenance costs (O&M) are well documented and evaluated when selecting and prioritizing projects, these costs have not been visibly incorporated into the Departments land acquisition project descriptions in budgets until the DOI began doing so in FY 2004. Beginning in FY 2006, the FS will also formally reflect O&M costs in their project descriptions of proposed LWCF land acquisitions in the budget justifications. Additionally, beginning in FY 2006, where relevant, both the DOI v
and the FS will require agencies to fund O&M for newly acquired land in the year following acquisition of a parcel of land. (See page 34 for more specifics.) 4) Agency Criteria The agencies recognize that any land acquisitions need to reflect Departmental objectives and agency goals. As part of the monitoring improvements suggested in Chapter 6, information garnered may be used to assess agency criteria in the future. The Forest Service has already determined that its ranking criteria for Land and Water Conservation Fund projects needed to better incorporate its Departmental conservation objectives and FS goals. As detailed in this report, the FS is updating its ranking criteria to ensure that these goals are taken into account. (See page 36 and Appendix B.) 5) Transfer of Military and other Federal Lands This report contains recommendations to better address costs associated with the transfer of former military and other Federal lands: creating clearer policies and regulations regarding the cleanup of lands, engaging in early consultations with the Department of Defense to improve the transfer process, developing model language and policies related to land transfers, and developing a shared approach to infrastructure issues (such as the management of abandoned buildings and the remediation of safety hazards). See Annex 3 for a discussion of these issues and recommendations. vi
CHAPTER 1: Introduction Report Language The House Report on the FY 2004 Appropriations Act for Interior and Related Agencies includes the following directive: The Committee directs the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to develop jointly a long-term national plan outlining the acreage goals and conservation objectives for Federal land acquisition. The plan must demonstrate how the agencies will work together to realize acreage goals and must include a schedule for monitoring progress in meeting Federal land acquisition goals. Additionally, the plan should: 1) evaluate existing authorities regarding the disposal and consolidation of Federal Lands; 2) review the methods employed for receiving and evaluating public input on potential acquisitions; and 3) address the reimbursement of all costs associated with the transfer of former military and other Federal lands to the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service. Scope and Organization This report responds to the Committee s directives outlined above by providing specific answers to the Committee s questions and concerns as well as by providing an overview of how the Federal land acquisition process operates. Given the Congressionally mandated distinct differences among the agency missions, this joint long-term national plan is not one plan, but by necessity, four separate yet interrelated plans. The following graphic is a roadmap depicting the sequence of steps the agencies use in their land management strategies. As described in this report, each agency has a process to determine which land management strategy to implement, including when to use acquisition as a land management tool. These complex processes take into account a wide variety of factors including available funding, public input, the effectiveness of various tools, biological issues, and several other relevant factors in order to help achieve Departmental objectives and agency goals. This roadmap is provided as a framework for the reader to highlight and link the major elements of the decision process. This report is divided into six chapters with three annexes, followed by appendices which provide more detailed information. The roadmap depicts the linkages among the six chapters in the report, which respond to the Committee s request for the development of a joint long-term national plan and conservation objectives. The annexes are not depicted in the roadmap as they are responses to the three discrete questions posed by the Committee regarding legislative authorities, public input processes, and the costs of Federal land transfers. 1
ROADMAP Missions, Profiles, and Acquisition Funding Sources for Land Management Agencies (Chapter 2) 2 Departmental Objectives and Agency Goals (Chapter 3 and Appendix A) Utilization of Non- Acquisition Tools (Chapter 4) Decision Processes and Consultations (Chapters 4 & 5) Monitor and Evaluate Progress Towards Goals and Objectives (Chapter 6) Land Acquisition Selected as Most Appropriate Tool (Chapter 4 and Appendices B and C)
Chapter 1: Introduction, provides a roadmap to the report outlining the sequence of steps in the agencies land management strategies; Chapter 2: Background, presents a brief overview of the mission of the four major land managing agencies and provides the context for why the agencies have different considerations for if and how they acquire land. The differences in agency missions shape the various agency goals and therefore decisions in determining which tool to use (including acquisition) to manage lands. Additionally, this chapter describes the acquisition authorities available to agencies, highlights examples of cooperative conservation tools, and provides an overview of the source and current amounts of acres managed; Chapter 3: Goals and Departmental Objectives, responds to the Committee s directive to outline conservation objectives (Resource Protection, Recreation, and Serving Communities) and introduces other Departmental objectives, such as Resource Use and Management Excellence. This chapter illustrates the nexus between the Departmental objectives and specific agency goals, and highlights how land acquisition helps achieve these objectives and goals both directly and indirectly. As depicted in the roadmap, these goals and objectives lay the foundation for the land management strategy. Additionally, this chapter highlights that acreage goals are not appropriate for a long-term national plan, as acquisition is a tool, or output, rather than an intrinsic goal. The broader goal is to protect land for conservation and other purposes. A plan predicated on acreage goals would not accomplish these objectives and goals, but would instead simply produce outputs (e.g., number of acres acquired) rather than outcomes (e.g., restoration of wetland habitat). Details to supplement this chapter are included in Appendix A; Chapter 4: Land Acquisition Strategy Tools and Processes, describes the processes agencies use to determine how best to manage and conserve public lands under their stewardship. As depicted in the roadmap, this chapter explains how agencies use a suite of tools to protect lands, of which acquisition is just one. Lastly, this chapter describes how agency goals and Departmental conservation objectives are considered when evaluating specific land acquisition projects. Specific information to supplement this chapter is included in Appendices B and C; Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination, responds to the Committee s request to demonstrate how the agencies coordinate on land acquisition activities and includes a proposal to strengthen this coordination. Additionally, this chapter includes information on how the agencies work with non-federal partners; and Chapter 6: Monitoring and Evaluation, addresses the Committee s request to show how the agencies monitor their progress in meeting their goals. Annexes 1, 2 and 3 each cover the specific directives relating to existing authorities, public input, and the reimbursement of costs correlated with the transfer of Federal lands, respectively. For the purposes of this report, land acquisition includes: acquiring fee, or less-than-fee interest by the following methods: purchase, donation, transfer, withdrawal, condemnation, and land exchange transactions. Land acquisition does not include sales; however, sales are discussed where appropriate in this report, as land disposal can be an important component of land management strategies. 3
CHAPTER 2: Background Missions, Profiles, and Acquisition Funding Sources for Land Management Agencies Departmental Objectives and Agency Goals Missions and Profiles of Land Managing Agencies Non-Acquisition Decision Processes and Consultations Monitor and Evaluate Progress Towards Goals and Objectives Acquisition This report focuses on the four major land-managing agencies, which administer approximately 632 million acres of lands, all funded through the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee. They are the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the U.S. Forest Service (FS) in the Department of Agriculture (USDA). Information regarding another DOI agency, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), which manages some 8.6 million acres, will be provided selectively. Background data on Reclamation is provided as summary information in Appendix D. ~628 Million Surface Acres Managed by Four Agencies Forest Service 31% BLM 42% As highlighted below, the Congressionally mandated missions of the four major landmanaging agencies in the DOI and the USDA are quite diverse and create disparity in the reasons for acquisition of land and its management. These differences set the context for this report. NPS 12% FWS 15% The Mission of the Bureau of Land Management is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation s public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Mission of the National Park Service is to preserve, unimpaired, the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education and inspiration of this and future generations. The NPS cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world. The Mission of the Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. 5
Given the diverse missions, the lands administered by the four agencies are managed for a variety of purposes. The BLM and FS lands are designated for multiple-use and as such provide diverse recreational opportunities, commodity uses, and an abundance of cultural resources. The FWS lands are managed primarily for flora and fauna resource protection, and the NPS protects natural and cultural resources for the visiting public. Details concerning each of the agencies follow: The Bureau of Land Management manages about one-eighth of the total land in the United States. In the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-579), Congress recognized the value of the public lands by declaring that these lands would generally remain in long-term public ownership and recognized the importance of the multiple-use management of these public lands. The following charts depict the acres currently administered by the BLM as well as the number of units and size of BLM special management areas. Acres Administered by BLM Acres Currently Managed by BLM (surface estate) Acres of On-Shore Federal Mineral Estate (on or underlying both Federal surface ownerships and privately owned surface) 262 million acres 700 million acres Over 7 million acres of non-federal inholding lands lie within National Monuments and National Conservation Areas, as well as several million acres of non-federal lands located in other BLM special management areas, or in areas that have special public access needs. BLM Special Management Area No. of Units Area / Distance National Monuments 15 4,806,947 acres National Conservation Areas 13 13,976,146 acres Wilderness Areas 161 6,515,287 acres Wilderness Study Areas 604 15,566,656 acres National Wild & Scenic Rivers 38 1,005,652 acres ACEC Areas 907 12,939,368 acres National Natural Landmarks 45 417,429 acres Research Natural Areas 184 426,566 acres Herd Management Areas 206 29,649,100 acres National Historic Trails 10 4,563 miles National Scenic Trails 2 640 miles National Recreation Trails 29 441 miles National Backcountry Byways 56 3,028 miles Over the years, the BLM has maintained a relatively constant number of acres of public land in Federal ownership. However, the BLM does have a variety of land disposal and land acquisition authorities available to improve the management efficiencies of the public lands and meet local community expansion and development needs. In fact, the BLM s land acquisitions are typically more than offset by the disposal of acreage. For example, from FY 2001 - FY 2003, net disposals by BLM exceeded net acquisitions by more than 430,000 acres. 6
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages migratory bird populations, restores interjurisdictional fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat, administers the Endangered Species Act (P.L. 93-205), and assists foreign governments with their conservation efforts. Its lands provide essential habitat for numerous wildlife species, recreational opportunities for the public, and a variety of benefits to local communities. The following chart depicts the acreage currently administered by the FWS within the approved acquisition boundaries for the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS), as well as the remaining acreage that has or has not been identified for acquisition. Acres Administered by FWS 1 Acres Currently Managed by FWS (85% of these acres were withdrawn from the public domain) 96.0 million acres Acres not Administered by FWS (Inholdings) Acres Adequately Protected through Means Other than Acquisition (e.g., partnerships with States) Acres Identified for Protection (protection may be achieved through FWS acquisition or by others in the conservation community) Within the next 15 years 2 At the end of 15 years 2 10.7 million acres 3.6 million acres 3.0 million acres Total acres within approved acquisition boundaries for NWRS 113.3 million acres 1 New units may be added, or additions can be made to existing units, as indicated by biological situations, Congress, or the Administration. 2 Acreage projections are based on a 15 year cycle. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world. The Land Resources Program, which manages the Federal acquisition of land and interests in land within the authorized boundary of National Park System units, works to support the mission of the National Park System. Acquisition of lands within the boundaries of units enables the NPS to maintain the physical Manatee and calf (photo: USGS) resources at each site, interpret the site in accordance with the individual unit s mission and goals, and provide visitor access where appropriate for education and recreation purposes. 7
Over the past ten years, 25 new units have been established by Congress. These range from the Flight 93 National Memorial to the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park. The following chart depicts the acreage currently administered by the NPS within the National Park System as well as the remaining acreage that has or has not been identified for acquisition within the Land Protection Plans for individual units: Acres Administered by NPS Acres Currently Managed by the NPS within the National Park System 1 (in fee or less-than-fee) 78 million acres Acres Not Administered by NPS (Inholdings) Acres Adequately Protected through Means Other than Acquisition (e.g., through zoning, therefore the NPS has no plans to acquire) 4.8 million acres Acres Identified for Either Fee or Less-than-Fee Acquisition (therefore recommended for purchase) Total Acres within NPS Boundaries 1 Includes submerged marine area acreage donated or transferred. 1.7 million acres 84.5 million acres The U.S. Forest Service manages over 192.4 million acres of lands. The purposes of National Forests have been set out in various Acts, beginning with the Organic Act of 1898 (P.L. 84-979), which established four basic purposes of Forest Reserves (now called National Forests): 1) Improve and protect the forests; 2) Secure favorable conditions of water flows; 3) Furnish a continuous supply of timber; and 4) Open the Forest Reserves for development and use. Other legislation broadened the mission for the FS by providing for: Acquisition of lands needed for the regulation of water flow of navigable streams or for the production of timber; Establishment and administration for outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish purposes; Multiple uses in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American people; Control of soil erosion, reforestation, preservation of natural resources, protection of fish and wildlife, development and protection of recreational facilities, mitigation of floods, prevention of impairment of dams and reservoirs, development of energy resources, conservation of surface and subsurface moisture, protection of the watersheds of navigable streams, and protection of the public lands health, safety and welfare; 8
Acquisition of lands as Research and Experimental Areas for the purpose of conducting research relating to the protection, management, utilization, and conservation of renewable resources on forests and rangelands; and Designation of special areas such as wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, recreation areas, trails, and scenic areas. The following chart depicts the total national acreage and units of land within the National Forest System: National Forest System No. of Units Area (acres) Acres not Administered by NFS within boundaries (inholdings) National Forests * 155 187,811,680 37,654,870 Purchase Units 59 361,688 1,879,606 National Grasslands 20 3,839,174 425,489 Land Utilization Projects 6 1,876 Research and Experimental Areas 20 64,871 8,283 Other Areas 34 295,814 592 National Preserves 1 89,716 TOTAL 295 192,464,819 39,968,840 * Included in the National Forest System acreages above are a significant number of Congressionally established Special Designated areas. These areas are identified in the following table. Special Designated Areas within National Forests No. of Units Area (acres) Acres not Administered by NFS within boundaries (inholdings) Wilderness Areas 420 34,752,767 452,200 National Primitive Area 1 173,762 1,350 National Scenic Areas 4 130,435 166,600 National Wild, Scenic & Recreation Rivers 45 946,321 251,530 TOTAL 470 36,003,285 871,680 9
The following two tables show sources of land by percentages and acres of managed surface lands for the BLM, FWS, NPS and FS: SOURCES OF SURFACE ACRES MANAGED Collectively, 628.4 million surface acres of land are managed by the BLM, FWS, NPS and FS Reserved / Withdrawn Lands 89.0% Purchases of Easements or Fee Simple Title 5.5% Exchanged Lands 2.3% Transferred Lands from other Federal Agencies 2.1% Donated Lands 1.1% Reserved/Withdrawn Lands: Part of the original public domain and never transferred from Federal ownership. Purchases of Easements: Partial interests in land. Fee Simple Title: Total interests in land. Exchanged Lands: Public domain lands traded for other equal value parcels owned by a variety of entities including private land owners. Donated Lands: Donated from individuals, organizations, or non-federal governmental entities. ORIGIN OF SURFACE ACRES OF LANDS MANAGED BY THE AGENCIES Reserve / Withdrawn Purchase 1 Exchange Transfer Donation Total BLM Percent 98.0 2 1.1 0.9 3 100.0 Acres in Millions 256.8 2.9 2.3 262.0 FWS Percent 85.5 4 7.3 0.5 4.9 1.8 100.0 Acres in Millions 82.1 7.0 0.5 4.7 1.7 96.0 NPS Percent 85.0 4 4.0 1.0 4.0 6.0 100.0 Acres in Millions 66.3 3.1 0.8 3.1 4.7 78.0 FS Percent 80.1 5 11.1 6 5.7 7 2.8 0.3 100.0 Acres in Millions 154.2 21.3 11.0 5.4 0.5 192.4 TOTAL Percent 89.0 5.5 2.3 2.1 1.1 100.0 Total Acres in Millions 559.4 34.3 14.6 13.2 6.9 628.4 1 Total includes easements and fee simple acquisitions. 2 Reserved lands in the public domain. 3 Represents data only since 1990. Other exchange lands would be reflected in purchase column. 4 Withdrawn from the public domain. 5 Includes 65,649 riparian reserved acres. 6 Includes 19,972 riparian acquired acres. 7 The U.S. Forest Service distinguishes between exchange acquired lands, which were previously patented out of Federal ownership (a U.S. government deed conveying legal title to public lands to the patentee) and then are re-acquired and exchange reserved lands, which are lands that have never been patented. 10
Produced by: Bureau of Land Management, WO-210 Planning, Assessment and Community Support, October 2001 Funding Sources A variety of authorities and funding sources are available to support the land acquisition goals and objectives of the agencies. The following list of funding sources provides an introduction to each source, and briefly describes how priorities are set and decisions are made. Additionally, a chart depicting the acreage and associated costs for acquired land by source, as well as a chart highlighting disposals are included on pages 14-15. Specific information on how acquisition decisions are made for each source, including agency priority ranking systems and criteria, can be found in Appendix B. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF, P.L. 88-578) This fund was established for acquisition of lands or for other uses (as determined by Congress) to ensure public access to outdoor recreational resources and to provide protection of critical resources. The NPS, FWS, FS, and BLM all utilize LWCF to support their agency goals and Departmental objectives. Each agency has created its own ranking system based on its mission to determine which projects should receive the highest priority for acquisition. These ranking systems are the primary tools by which agencies establish their annual land acquisition budget request. Nominations for LWCF projects stem from the local level and nationwide rankings are compiled at the Departmental level from regional submissions. The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA) of 1998 (P.L. 105-263) and the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) of 2000 (P.L. 106-248) With the enactment of these laws, the BLM has new authorities to generate funds from public land sales that may benefit land acquisitions by the BLM, FWS, NPS, and the FS. The revenues from public land sales in the Las Vegas area, under SNPLMA, are made 11
available for land acquisitions, and for other local recreation and conservation benefits, to the agencies in Nevada without the need for separate appropriations from Congress. Between November, 1999 (first sale), and June, 2004 (most recent sale), 8,142 acres were sold, for a total of $1,383,744,611. As shown on the chart on page 14, 1,019 acres (for a total of over $10.8 million) have been acquired by BLM with these funds. However, an existing balance of over $300 million of obligated projects have been approved by the Secretary of the Interior and await completion. Similarly, FLTFA provides authority to the BLM to generate funds from public land sales that would be available for land acquisitions by the agencies without the need for further appropriations from Congress. However, the potential to generate substantial funds from public land sales in other States, similar to the level of activity in Las Vegas, is not as great since land in Las Vegas is so high in value. In addition, FLTFA generally limits the provision of funds to land acquisitions in the western States. Priorities for both SNPLMA and FLTFA acquisitions are based on local nominations for resource conservation. Interagency committees at the local level then rank and prioritize the recommendations, which are eventually reviewed by the agency managers and the Departments. The Migratory Bird Conservation Fund (MBCF) This is another major funding source available to the FWS and is funded principally by the sale of Duck Stamps and import duties on arms and ammunition. Funds available from the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund for acquisition within existing refuge boundaries are generally in the range of $40 million to $50 million per year, and the goals and objectives for the land acquisition effort are driven by the wetlands and migratory bird habitat needs of the units in the National Wildlife Refuge System. The FWS prepares an annual plan, based on immediate acquisition opportunities identified, to be approved by the Director. The proposals in this plan are then brought to the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission, established under the provisions of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 (P.L. 70-770), for approval. The North American Wetland Conservation Act (NAWCA) of 1989 (P.L. 101-233) NAWCA also provides some funding to the FWS for land acquisitions within approved boundaries to support the protection of wetlands habitat. This major source of Federal funding is to encourage partnership efforts to protect, enhance, restore, and manage wetlands and other habitats for migratory birds and other fish and wildlife to carry out the objectives of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Funds available from NAWCA usually range between $40 million to $50 million per year; however, very few of these funds are used for refuge land acquisition, as most of the funding is allocated to partners in Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The North American Wetlands Council reviews and approves the grant proposals, based on specific criteria, which are then presented to the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission for approval. Land exchanges While not a funding source, land exchanges are included in this list because they are the tool often used by both the BLM and the FS to acquire lands for resource benefits as well as to improve land ownership configuration for management efficiencies. These are generally authorized under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579) (coupled with the Weeks Act (P.L. 61-435) or the General Exchange Act (P.L. 67-173) for the FS) and are funded within existing agency appropriations. Land exchanges can also be used by the NPS and the FWS to acquire lands and may provide some opportunities to offset the need for LWCF appropriations from Congress for other agency land acquisition needs. Land exchanges by their very nature are complex transactions and involve both the disposal of Federal land and the acquisition of non-federal land. Public input, consistency with land use plans, and screening criteria help to determine whether an agency will enter into an agreement to initiate a land exchange. 12
Cooperative Conservation Both Departments believe that conservation neither can, nor should, rely solely on the Federal government. By partnering with States, Tribes, community organizations, and individual citizens through a host of programs, the Departments are encouraging a stewardship ethic for America that is citizen-led and landscape-based. These cooperative programs offer alternative tools to protect and manage lands without turning directly to Federal acquisition. Moreover, they result in significant leveraging of Federal funds and often broaden the ways in which lands are managed and conservation goals are achieved. In the last several budget cycles, DOI has made a conscious effort to balance Federal LWCF funding with funding for other programs, particularly cooperative conservation programs. Further, the future availability of better information on strategic plan outcomes should, over time, provide a more reliable basis to gauge the relative effectiveness of different tools and thus improve the linkage to budget formulation. The Forest Service s Forest Legacy Program (FLP), now funded as part of the LWCF, is an example of such cooperative conservation and is an integral part of the broader FS Land Acquisition Program. The FLP, established in the 1990 Farm Bill to protect environmentally important forest areas that are threatened by conversion to non-forest uses and to promote private forestland protection through the use of conservation easements and fee-simple purchase, involves a partnership between State and Private Forestry and National Forest System mission areas of the Forest Service, State Foresters, local governments, land trusts, and interested landowners to conserve environmentally important forests. The FLP assures that both traditional uses of private lands and the public benefits of America's forests are protected for future generations. It provides an incentive-based mechanism to protect critical wildlife habitat, conserve watershed functions, and maintain recreation opportunities. The program uses a national competition to determine priority projects for funding. The Department of the Interior also has a variety of Cooperative Conservation Programs, such as the Landowner Incentive Program, the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund, and the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program. The latter has allowed the FWS to establish productive relationships with communities, conservation partners, Tribes, and over 30,000 landowners while providing them with both financial and technical assistance. Through this voluntary grant program, landowners are given the tools they need to make private lands working landscapes that benefit wildlife while maintaining productive activities. Since its creation in 1987, the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program has established over 28,000 agreements with landowners resulting in the restoration of 1,060,000 acres of uplands, 649,300 acres of wetlands, and 4,670 miles of riparian and in-stream habitat. Under an Executive Order on Cooperative Conservation signed by President Bush in August 2004, agencies are enhancing their capacity to partner with others to achieve conservation goals. Acreage Charts The chart on the following page shows the acres acquired by the BLM, FWS, NPS, and FS between FY 2001 - FY 2003, along with the associated costs, and sources of funds. 13
Acres Acquired and Associated Costs (FY 2001 FY 2003) Bureau FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 Three Year Total Acres Cost Acres Cost Acres Cost Acres Cost BLM Exchange a/ 209,883 $10,000,000 77,039 $11,234,000 13,191 $12,241,000 300,113 $33,475,000 Purchase FLTFA (Baca II) b/ 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 LWCF Fee c/ 111,381 $34,143,896 112,904 $22,033,896 12,274 $21,862,715 236,559 $78,040,507 Easement 4,963 $6,152,044 4,924 $9,881,466 3,588 $4,517,370 13,475 $20,550,880 SNPLMA 0 $0 551 $1,976,000 468 $8,893,000 1,019 $10,869,000 Other Purchases d/ Fee 101 $165,000 2,246 $344,231 3,441 $1,400,815 5,788 $1,910,046 Easement 202 $102,570 1,171 $1,649,677 77 $32,479 1,450 $1,784,726 Donation Fee e/ 715 $0 7,997 $0 64,162 $0 72,874 $0 Easement 0 $0 1 $0 393 $0 394 $0 Total BLM 327,245 $50,563,510 206,833 $47,119,270 97,594 $48,947,379 631,672 $146,630,159 FWS Purchase LWCF Fee 26,476 $66,006,537 42,502 $64,613,508 35,517 $66,660,614 104,495 $197,280,659 Easement 16,972 $3,553,170 49,128 $6,894,719 31,640 $4,496,024 97,740 $14,943,913 MBCF Fee 23,110 $22,580,867 24,760 $28,909,581 37,178 $24,612,753 85,048 $76,103,201 Easement 79,228 $12,052,420 49,222 $9,398,349 38,815 $8,696,745 167,265 $30,147,514 NAWCA Fee 1,419 $1,073,222 563 $941,896 128 $242,500 2,110 $2,257,618 Easement 5,219 $308,775 12,356 $678,075 2,931 $288,160 20,506 $1,275,010 SNPLMA f/ Fee 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Easement 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Other Funding g/ Fee 4,249 $6,165,178 3,351 $4,309,037 1,308 $4,250,222 8,908 $14,724,437 Easement 9,483 $6,518,300 2,124 $6,783,750 2,922 $288,160 14,529 $13,590,210 Transfer & Donation Fee 970,943 $0 41,641 $0 348,195 $0 1,360,779 $0 Easement 24,167 $0 6,566 $0 11,078 $0 41,811 $0 Total FWS 1,161,266 $118,258,469 232,213 $122,528,915 509,712 $109,535,178 1,903,191 $350,322,562 NPS Exchange h/ Fee 94 $0 10 $0 1,047 $0 1,151 $0 Easement 63 $0 7 $0 16 $0 86 $0 Purchase LWCF i/ Fee j/ 15,235 9,425 131,122 155,782 $83,247,000 $94,404,422 $109,838,355 Easement 75 743 304 1,122 $287,489,777 SNPLMA 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Donation Fee 5,709 $0 7,819 $0 1,898 $0 15,426 $0 Easement 507 $0 206 $0 337 $0 1,050 $0 Transfer 41,749 $0 187 $0 7 $0 41,943 $0 Withdraw 47,353 $0 0 $0 0 $0 47,353 $0 Total NPS 110,785 $83,247,000 18,397 $94,404,422 134,731 $109,838,355 263,913 $287,489,777 USFS Exchange k/ 35,132 $0 10,915 $0 25,981 $0 72,028 $0 Purchase LWCF l/ 128,913 $119,835,350 42,817 $106,138,233 75,476 $171,949,482 247,206 $397,923,065 SNPLMA 0 $0 0 $0 1,789 $29,000,000 1,789 $29,000,000 Donation 12 $0 207 $0 1,858 $0 2,077 $0 Total USFS 164,057 $119,835,350 53,939 $106,138,233 105,104 $200,949,482 323,100 $426,923,065 GRAND TOTAL 1,763,353 $371,904,329 511,382 $370,190,840 847,141 $469,270,394 3,121,876 $1,211,365,563 a/ Administrative costs shown are overall costs for all land exchanges and include some cash equalization payments. Value of exchanged lands are not included as there are no purchase costs. b/ There is a $16.3 M outstanding balance in the land acquisition portion of BACA. Of this balance, a $5.2 M request is currently pending with the Secretary of the Interior. c/ Includes an FY 2001 97,865 acre purchase, valued at $10,889,439 within the California Wilderness project and includes an FY 2002 93,095 acre purchase, valued at $3,100,000 within the California Wilderness project. d/ From resource program activities and mitigation funds. e/ Includes an FY 2003 63,288 acre donation, valued at $11,100,387 within the California Wilderness project. f/ No funds for acquisitions, restoration only. g/ Includes other non-specified funding sources. h/ NPS does not track administrative costs or equalization payments for exchanges. The value of exchanged lands are not included as there are no purchase costs. i/ Costs include both fee and easement purchases. j/ Includes an FY 2003 115,788 acre purchase at Hawaii Volcanos NP. k/ In FY 2005, FS will begin tracking administrative costs per acre for all exchanges and acquisitions. Value of exchanged lands are not included as there are no purchase costs. l/ Fee title and easement. Costs reflect total spending for the LWCF program. 14
The following chart displays the land disposals by the BLM, NPS, and FS between FY 2001-2003: Disposals by Land Managing Agencies (Acres) * FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 Total BLM Exchanges 245,721 230,719 21,701 498,141 Sales 181,304 353,736 29,467 564,166 NPS Disposals 3,547 18 25 3,590 FS Exchanges 25,340 7,514 7,654 40,508 TOTAL 455,912 591,987 58,847 1,106,405 * FWS and NPS do not engage in land sales. Land is disposed through exchanges. FWS did not have significant disposals during this period. 15
CHAPTER 3: Missions of Land Management Agencies Goals and Departmental Objectives Non-Acquisition Departmental Objectives and Agency Goals Decision Processes and Consultations Monitor and Evaluate Progress Towards Goals and Objectives Acquisition In the House report accompanying the FY 2004 appropriations bill, the Committee articulated questions concerning the land acquisition goals and conservation objectives for the land management agencies. Specifically, the Committee expressed interest in how land acquisition goals and conservation objectives are established, and how the land acquisition goals are prioritized. This chapter and the associated appendix (Appendix A) outline Departmental objectives, focusing on the conservation objectives, and describe how these objectives and agency goals set the direction for potential land acquisition. This chapter also explains that the concept of acreage goals is not appropriate as a component of a long-term land acquisition plan. Finally, this chapter highlights DOI s seven principles that guide land acquisition and provides examples of how agencies currently integrate these principles into their land transaction processes. Departmental Objectives In responding to the Committee s charge to develop a long-term plan outlining conservation objectives, the Departments determined that broader, mission-oriented goals are the most appropriate to set the context for the four related land acquisition plans. The following three Departmental conservation objectives, stemming from the DOI s Strategic Plan (FY 2003-2008), best outline the mission responsibilities and ultimate conservation objectives of the various agencies. Although the objectives are derived from the DOI s Strategic Plan, they also serve as Departmental conservation objectives for the FS, as these are shared priorities across the Departments. The Departmental conservation objectives are as follows: 1) Resource Protection Protect the Nation s natural, cultural, and heritage resources; 2) Recreation Provide recreation opportunities for America; and 3) Serving Communities Safeguard lives, property and assets, advance scientific knowledge, and improve the quality of life for communities we serve. Resource Use, while not a Departmental conservation objective, is another Departmental objective important to the agencies as highlighted in the matrix on pages 20-21. Additionally, the ways in which the land acquisition programs support Management Excellence, another Departmental objective, are woven throughout the rest of this report. Each agency has goals stemming from a variety of sources (strategic plans, GPRA goals, and others) which support overall Departmental objectives. These agency goals were formulated through various processes, usually commencing at the local level with significant public input. 17